The following is an edited transcript excerpt from <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mks-ep-1945-sub?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel">The Michael Knowles Show</a>.
* * *
A huge proportion of babies born in the United States are now born to foreign nationals who are cheating the immigration system. 
Can we acknowledge this whole “anchor baby” thing is a problem? I should hope so but I’m not totally sure that we can.
The whole concept of birthright citizenship comes from the British. The idea stems from a distinction between jus soli — the right-of-the-soil — and jus sanguinis — the right-of-blood. The notion that you get your citizenship from the blood of your parents versus receiving citizenship because you were born on certain soil.
Well, we get the idea from English common law. And guess what? The English — the Brits — have not had jus soli, right-of-the-soil birthright citizenship, since 1983. So even they recognized there’s a problem.
Can we too recognize that there’s a problem here?
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/mks-ep-1945-sub?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-1054531 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg" alt="DailyWire+" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1024x171.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-768x128.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1-1536x256.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/03/MK-watch-now-1.jpg 1800w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
Western Lensman gives some very good background on this topic on X, posting a clip about pregnant mothers from Turkey giving birth in the United States. Here&#8217;s the clip:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
2020. Turkish anchor baby ring found operating in Long Island, NY — mothers got taxpayer funded healthcare.
This is insane:
&#8220;Prosecutors say more than 100 pregnant women from Turkey came here to give birth, so their children were instantly granted U.S. citizenship.&#8221;… <a href="https://t.co/mjxyihjeO2">https://t.co/mjxyihjeO2</a> <a href="https://t.co/QcWl50rEXd">pic.twitter.com/QcWl50rEXd</a>
— Western Lensman (@WesternLensman) <a href="https://twitter.com/WesternLensman/status/2039716413225550306?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 2, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Source: WesternLensman/X.com
There are “anchor baby” operations — what amount to birth tourism schemes — that have been operating in this country for years. Prosecutors described a case on Long Island where more than 100 pregnant women from Turkey came to the U.S. to give birth so their children would automatically receive U.S. citizenship.
<blockquote>The defendants fraudulently facilitated the births in the United States of approximately 119 Turkish children. And those children now hold birthright U.S. citizenship.</blockquote>
Officials alleged the scheme was openly advertised abroad — essentially marketing the idea: if you want your child to be born in the United States and become an American citizen, this is how you do it.
This is a business. This is an industry.
You see versions of this in other countries too — there were similar cases involving Chinese birth tourism operations in the past.
So, again I ask, can we acknowledge that this is a problem?
Yes.
Where does the problem derive from? It derives from what is now an outmoded conception from English common law — so much so that the English themselves moved away from it — and from interpretations of the 14th Amendment that have been expanded far beyond what some argue was originally intended.
So what’s the solution?
The solution, very obviously, would be to place limits on how birthright citizenship is applied. You don’t necessarily have to eliminate it entirely — you could define it more narrowly. Some argue that even within the text of the 14th Amendment there are grounds for interpretation about who qualifies, since the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has historically been debated.
That’s the argument.
And the broader point is this: if a country cannot define who is and is not a citizen, then it raises serious questions about sovereignty and governance.
That’s why this debate keeps coming up.

New parents watching babies in hospital nursery

‘Anchor Baby’ Schemes Are Thriving And The System Making It Possible Is Still Untouched

14th Amendment

babies

birthright citizenship

citizenship

Great Britain

Michael Knowles

Pregnancy

Turkey

The Daily Wire&#8217;s Isabel Brown fired back after the hosts of ABC&#8217;s &#8220;The View&#8221; went into full meltdown mode on Monday over her passionate support for younger women embracing more traditional families.
&#8220;I’d like to thank the women of @TheView for showing their truest, darkest colors today: they’re literally shrieking like demons at the thought of encouraging young women to have children. PS &#8211; &#8216;stupidest&#8217; isn&#8217;t a real word,&#8221; Brown posted.
&#8220;They want you to hate happy, healthy, fulfilled young people with kids. Even more disturbingly, they want you to hate babies so much that you never want them in the first place. Their response to my encouragement for Gen Z women to get married and have kids? &#8216;You&#8217;re telling people to have as many babies as they want to? Again I&#8217;m going to send you back into the past,'&#8221; Brown continued. &#8220;In other words, *wanting* a baby literally is not a choice as a so-called &#8217;empowered&#8217; woman in 2026.&#8221;
Brown doubled down, saying that she believed the family was the &#8220;strongest threat to evil&#8221; in the world, and adding, &#8220;Again, I reiterate: HAVE THE COURAGE to get married and have a beautiful family. Your life will be better because of it.&#8221;
After promising to further address the topic — and the comments from &#8220;The View&#8221; — on her next Daily Wire show, Brown shared the full segment from the ABC midday talk show: &#8220;If you just can&#8217;t help yourself in the meantime &amp; want to grab some popcorn — here&#8217;s the whole segment of 5 grown women screeching about how I am the &#8220;stupidest&#8221; person on the Internet, who should divorce my husband, and probably never should have become a mom in the first place. Misery sure loves projection, doesn&#8217;t it?&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
And if you just can&#8217;t help yourself in the meantime &amp; want to grab some popcorn &#8211; here&#8217;s the whole segment of 5 grown women screeching about how I am the &#8220;stupidest&#8221; person on the Internet, who should divorce my husband, and probably never should have become a mom in the first… <a href="https://t.co/ijm2z8MxfV">pic.twitter.com/ijm2z8MxfV</a>
— Isabel Brown (@theisabelb) <a href="https://twitter.com/theisabelb/status/2038691529795965026?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 30, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Whoopi Goldberg opened the segment with a clip of Brown, speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), encouraging young women to get married and have children — and she and her cohosts immediately claimed that Brown was promoting backward thinking.
Goldberg began by claiming that women of color had been criticized in the past for having too many children, saying they were the reason that government assistance programs were getting cut.
Cohost Sara Haines argued that by promoting traditional families, Brown was reducing women to only the value of their reproductive organs: &#8220;The whole women&#8217;s movement was not about bucking the trend of staying at home or loving tradition. It was giving women a choice to do what they wanted. And that&#8217;s what this is too. Marriage, children. It&#8217;s a choice.&#8221;
&#8220;The fact we keep putting this on women, that their only worth in society, politics, policy is if they produce a baby or have a husband is the stupidest, most old-fashioned thing!&#8221; Haines continued. &#8220;We have come too far! The world has over 8 billion people! We no longer need to force people to procreate and pump out babies! We have arrived here! Women now and girls now have a choice!&#8221;
Ana Navarro also weighed in, ignoring the fact that Brown had been clear about women getting married prior to starting families and complaining that no one was expecting men to step up and be responsible for all the babies.
&#8220;If you&#8217;re not paying my bills, you don&#8217;t get to tell me what I do with my uterus,&#8221; she declared.
Cohost Sunny Hostin went a different direction entirely, claiming that Brown&#8217;s position was untenable primarily because of President Donald Trump. Blaming him for the fact that child care was too expensive for most working families, Hostin argued that women should think twice before following her advice.
Goldberg followed right behind, arguing that red states were enacting laws that were not encouraging women to do anything other than &#8220;flee&#8221; from them: &#8220;You&#8217;re telling people to have as many babies as they want to? Again I&#8217;m going to send you back into the past.&#8221;

Isabel Brown

Daily Wire Host Fires Back After ‘The View’ Melts Down Over Her Support For Young Families

Daily Wire Host Fires Back After 'The View' Melts Down Over Her Support For Young Families

family

Media

Politics

The Daily Wire

The View

Welcome to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
Pro-abortion advocates speak often about women’s health and “rights.” At the darkest moment of my life, however, they offered me nothing more than a pill and the lie that my impending abortion would be “just like having a period.” Years later, after grieving my lost child and overcoming the trauma of abortion, I am appalled that activists market abortion drugs as “<a href="https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/the-abortion-pill/how-safe-is-the-abortion-pill" target="_blank" rel="noopener">safe</a>,” and “<a href="https://www.reproductiveaccess.org/2022/03/safe-effective-empowering-self-managed-abortion/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">empowering</a>.” I am also shocked that these drugs are available via mail order, which leaves women to suffer alone or to experience forced abortions at the hands of abusers.
My experience with abortion drugs opened my eyes to the fact that they endanger women’s health, safety, and happiness. Truly empowering women means ensuring that they are fully informed before they decide about something that could negatively change their lives.
In 2018, I discovered I was unexpectedly pregnant. I already had a son and was not yet married to my then-boyfriend, Lane. Lane thought abortion was our only option. Fearing I could lose the first good relationship I’d been in, I decided to pursue abortion to appease him. Lane and I ventured to Planned Parenthood, where we rejected the offer to see our baby on the ultrasound screen.
The nurse seemed to realize my discomfort and suggested that I take a few weeks to think through the decision since I was still so early in my pregnancy. Secretly hoping Lane would change his mind, I agreed to take the time. Yet after two weeks passed, Lane was still sure abortion was our only choice.
Leading up to the abortion, I was terrified. I shook uncontrollably and had an awful feeling about what it entailed. When we arrived at Planned Parenthood, staff told me that I could take the chemical abortion pill, that it would just be like a heavy period, and that everything would be fine. They did not warn me about any long-term physical or emotional effects.
I should have listened to my gut — especially after hearing the grief of the couple in the hospital room next to Lane and me, where another young woman sobbed while her partner told her it was the only choice they had. My heart breaks for her to this day.
When the doctor arrived to check in on Lane and me, I asked him again if he was sure this was what we wanted to do. Rather than seeing that I was feeling pressured into this major decision, the doctor expressed annoyance while telling me to take it or leave it.
I took it.
Afterward, I went to the pharmacy to pick up the next set of pills. I’ll never forget the pharmacist’s face — his unmistakably sad expression and our mutual knowledge that he could not interfere with what I was about to do.
When I got home, I became drowsy and kept waking up to intense and extremely painful cramps. Because I’d had a baby before, I realized with shock that my body was not just having a “normal period,” but that the pills I’d naively swallowed were preparing my body for labor. After intense pain and bleeding, I ran to the bathroom. I felt something pass. There, in the toilet, was my baby.
I was in a state of shock. Nobody had prepared me for any of this. I didn’t know what to do, so I simply cleaned myself up and got back in bed. The next week, shock turned to extreme grief. The next month, I felt guilt. Then followed years of mingled guilt, grief, and suffering. At times, I felt like I had genuinely lost my mind — an emotional reaction I have since learned was due to my abortion. In all that time, Planned Parenthood never once reached out to check on me and Lane.
Lane and I slowly picked up the pieces of our relationship and lives and tried to heal. We both struggled to forgive ourselves. Through God’s grace and forgiveness, however, we were more vulnerable with each other and began rediscovering our faith. Through prayer and communication, Lane and I slowly learned that what we thought would be forever was just a temporary suffering that opened our eyes to the horrors of abortion drugs.
Today, we hope to turn the tragedy of our story into hope for others who might be struggling. To those who may find themselves in our shoes, I encourage you to trust your gut and to make sure you are fully informed before agreeing to a permanent decision that could leave you with painful scars while robbing you of your unborn child. I urge any woman to look at the ultrasound before making a permanent decision. We wish with our whole hearts that we would have.
I hope you also know that you don’t have to grieve or undergo this suffering alone. Across the country, a network of nearly 3,000 pregnancy resource centers strives daily to meet the material, financial, emotional, and even professional or educational needs of women and children in need. These organizations provide <a id="m_-1227438176112384738m_1183941747262835175OWA096ace12-89ba-23df-8f05-764a436af953" href="https://lozierinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/A-Legacy-of-Life-Love-2025-Rising-to-the-Occasion-with-Unwavering-Care.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://lozierinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/A-Legacy-of-Life-Love-2025-Rising-to-the-Occasion-with-Unwavering-Care.pdf&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1771510971851000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0dQPvCJRrwHiKq9PG7Nkjk">hundreds of millions of dollars&#8217;</a> worth of lifesaving support that offers women alternatives to abortions they do not need and <a id="m_-1227438176112384738m_1183941747262835175OWAc08e866a-5733-03dd-3f32-95cc4af1a55a" href="https://lozierinstitute.org/hidden-epidemic-nearly-70-of-abortions-are-coerced-unwanted-or-inconsistent-with-womens-preferences/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://lozierinstitute.org/hidden-epidemic-nearly-70-of-abortions-are-coerced-unwanted-or-inconsistent-with-womens-preferences/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1771510971851000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3SA5iv4OiArGttgO1_7gdq">often do not want</a>.
Not only that, but they exist to offer hope and healing to women who have experienced abortion, like me. And unlike those pushing abortion drugs without informed consent, these wonderful people will do everything they can to make you feel known, supported, and loved.
***
McKenzie Kaupa-Thiesse is a wife, mother, and fighter for the unborn.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Ultrasound of a pregnant woman and pills medication

They Said Abortion Was The Only Option — Here’s What They Left Out

Abortion

Abortion Drug

Upstream

Women

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
Perhaps the most common feature of the <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/14/politics/maha-birth-control-politics-of-the-pill">flurry</a> <a href="https://www.ama-assn.org/public-health/population-health/what-doctors-wish-patients-knew-about-birth-control">of</a> <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/10/27/nx-s1-5535839/population-shift-birth-rate-misinformation">articles</a> <a href="https://www.kff.org/health-information-trust/misleading-narratives-and-social-media-shape-contraception-perceptions/">about</a> <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953623004380">young</a> <a href="https://msmagazine.com/2025/12/17/young-women-teen-girls-gen-z-birth-control-beliefs-democrat-republican-tiktok-misinformation-contraception/">women</a> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/sep/17/birth-control-why-are-influencers-turning-away-from-the-pill-and-towards-natural-contraceptive-methods">rejecting</a> <a href="https://nypost.com/2025/10/09/health/ob-gyn-reveals-troubling-trend-shes-seeing-with-gen-z-women/">hormonal</a> <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/02/style/birth-control-skepticism-wellness-tiktok.html">birth</a> <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2024/03/21/stopping-birth-control-misinformation/">control</a> is the claim that their concerns are fueled by “misinformation” or based on “unfounded theories.” I’m a younger millennial. I’ve never used hormonal birth control, and I don’t plan to. But what these writers and doctors fail to grasp is how fed up women are of being told their pain is normal and prescribed a pill at 13, only to be told they have “unexplained infertility” and need IVF at 30.
It doesn’t take a medical degree to hypothesize that women’s healthcare has gone terribly wrong. It is almost entirely structured around either suppressing or bypassing the female reproductive system altogether. When journalists and doctors claim women like me are misinformed, they reject an opportunity to help make women healthier. 
For 60 years now, the standard of care for women in the United States has been a protocol that seeks not to understand and work with the female body, but to inhibit and short-circuit it. It’s no surprise that the women who watched their mothers and grandmothers unquestioningly swallow the pill and continue to suffer are now demanding a better way.
The increased rejection of hormonal birth control also comes amid a tectonic shift in medical treatment for minors.  Several major medical associations recently issued <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/pediatricians-group-says-research-doesnt-support-gender-affirming-treatments">statements</a> against pediatric gender transition in the wake of the Fox Varin lawsuit, which held medical providers responsible for performing a double mastectomy on a minor. Sex-rejection treatments and surgeries involve medicating children with puberty blockers and hormone therapies, among other things. And yet many adolescent girls, some as young as 11, are prescribed hormone therapy in the form of the hormonal birth control pill or an IUD, despite their long-term effects being largely unknown.
Of sexually active 15 to 19-year-olds, almost half are prescribed some form of hormonal birth control. This, despite the fact that there are no large randomized controlled trials on the effects of synthetic hormones during girls’ pubescent years. Some research on this cohort has shown <a href="https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/120/5/1135/71113/Contraception-and-Adolescents?utm">reductions</a> in <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010782408002801?utm_source">bone mass</a> and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40097087/">density</a>, which is itself concerning. But little exists on long-term effects to adolescent brain or cardiovascular health, both of which actively require sex hormones for development. Animal studies <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40188588/">show</a> that exposure to hormonal contraceptives during adolescence has persistent effects on the female brain and behavior, though it’s unclear how this translates to humans.
Your response to women rejecting hormonal birth control will almost certainly depend upon your answer to one question: What is medicine? The same ideology that undergirds the transgender movement forms the foundation of women’s health, too: “My body, my choice.” But making your body in your own self-image is not medicine. It’s choice theory applied to the human body. And the philosophy of choice will always be insufficient because it inherently rejects the bounds of reality.
What if women’s health was actually about making women healthy instead of maximizing choice? The solution to America’s health problem is the same as the solution to transgender ideology: Respect reality, recognize that our bodies bound us and we can’t make ourselves into whatever we choose to be, and accept that women’s bodies are different from men’s. That’s not only okay but also good. Women’s bodies were made to bear children; blaming the patriarchy or <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-pursuit-of-equality-is-ruining-your-marriage">raging about the system</a> will not change that fact. Let medicine be about restoring the body’s natural function, not trying to change it. When we become unfocused on what the practice of medicine is in principle, people get hurt, even when medical professionals have the best intentions.
As a woman who has been on the receiving end of so-called “women’s healthcare,” it seems as though there is little will to understand the potentially negative effects of hormonal birth control, or the positive effects of working with rather than against the female body’s natural function. After all, birth control is convenient and perhaps even something of a sacrament to the feminized, sexually evolved West.
“Women have been taking the pill for decades,” I was told by a pushy doctor at an Ivy League research hospital, who wouldn’t let me leave his exam room without a prescription for the minipill for the extreme cramps I was having in my early 20s. When I asked for a hormone panel to help diagnose a potentially underlying health condition, fearful I’d be unable to conceive later in life, he said, perhaps revealing more about himself than intended, that a hormone panel wouldn’t tell him anything.
But not all women’s health practitioners are so unimaginative. Dr. Naomi Whittaker is a board-certified OBGYN and surgeon focused on women&#8217;s restorative reproductive medicine. She’s also the founder of <a href="https://www.rrmacademy.org/">RRM Academy</a>, which employs both conventional medicine and the latest in restorative reproductive techniques. “Working with the female body rather than against it is the cornerstone of what I do,” she said. “I see hormones not as a nuisance to suppress, but as a language the body uses to communicate.” She calls restoring the body’s natural function “the spirit of restorative reproductive medicine.”
Even still, the establishment offers these doctors no help. Medical associations and education do not teach the kind of medicine Dr. Whittaker practices, and they are deeply skeptical of it. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Society for Reproductive Medicine have <a href="https://www.asrm.org/globalassets/_asrm/advocacy-and-policy/advocacy-activities/2025/2025-08-13-joint_letter_opposing_rrm_081425.pdf">issued statements</a> and <a href="https://www.asrm.org/news-and-events/asrm-news/press-releasesbulletins/asrm-hosts-capitol-hill-briefing-for-policymakers--congressional-staff-to-hear-from-providers--patients-about-importance-of-ivf-access-realities-and-limitations-of-restorative-reproductive-medicine/">held congressional briefings</a> against restorative reproductive medicine. After all, it is a competitor to the medical status quo at a time when the government has expressed more interest in women’s health and fertility. It seems as though the medical establishment is vying for a cut of a much-hoped-for government check.
Regardless, women continue rejecting the status quo. And this rejection comes amid an explosion of so-called “fem-tech” companies marketing devices (usually wearables, such as rings or watches) to assist women in either avoiding or achieving pregnancy naturally.
These devices use sensors to track temperature, sleep, and heart rate, among other things, to pinpoint ovulation or even underlying health conditions. Natural Cycles, which uses an AI algorithm adjusted to each individual user, became the first app to be cleared by the Food and Drug Administration as birth control in 2018. And Oura, whose sensor-laden rings have become something of a <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2026/02/09/oura-ring-lobbying-rfk-maha-washington-00770320?nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&amp;nname=playbook&amp;nrid=b076877d-0054-4fa6-8bd9-93aa06bde864">status symbol</a> in Washington, is aiming higher than transforming women’s healthcare: It is purporting to change the face of American healthcare altogether.
Wearables such as the Oura ring are not only designed for tracking menstrual cycles, though they can do that. They are also designed to help wearers know more about their bodies (sleep quality and blood oxygen, activity, or stress levels, for example) and to help alert them to potential illness. Only a few months ago, an older-style wearable — the Fitbit — alerted me that my heart was in arrhythmia and told me to go to the emergency room. At 31, I am not the usual candidate for atrial fibrillation, and the ER doctor assumed the device had been faulty. After performing an EKG, he was amazed to find the watch had been right. Untreated heart arrhythmias are the most common cause of sudden cardiac death in the world.
American medicine has long suffered from being reactive rather than proactive. We treat symptoms and diseases rather than teaching people how to avoid them. After all, symptom and disease management is where all the money is, and healthcare, like all businesses, needs money to survive. But wearables may be a sign that’s changing. After all, Oura’s market valuation of $11 billion dollars is more than four times greater than it was just three years ago. 
As women continue rejecting the pill, those beholden to the medical status quo will probably continue blaming women for falling prey to misinformation. That’s a lazy response. They’d do well to look a little closer: Women may be the early adopters of a new age of American medicine, rejecting pills and their unintended side effects in favor of preventative and restorative approaches, with wearables at the helm. American women seem to be ahead of the curve in heralding a return to true medicine. The only question is: Will the medical establishment get on board?
***
Katelyn Walls Shelton (<a href="https://x.com/AnnaKateShelt">@AnnaKateShelt</a>) is a visiting fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center’s Bioethics, Technology, and Human Flourishing Program and a 2025 Robert Novak Journalism Fellow. Her Substack is <a href="https://katelynshelton.substack.com/">Technically Human</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Birth Control Pills, Female Contraception Estrogen Hormones, Prescription Medicine for PMS

The Pill Revolt — Why Millennial Women Like Me Are Rethinking Hormonal Birth Control

Birth Control

Health

Media Bias

Technology

As if the 2020s couldn’t get more surreal, the United States is no longer only a global leader in economic and military power — but it has now become the go-to international hub for mass-producing babies.
This is not hyperbole. Chinese video-game billionaire <a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/chinese-billionaires-surrogacy-pregnancy-7fdfc0c3">Xu Bo</a> has reportedly fathered over 100 children — 12 of whom so far have been born via surrogates in the USA, thus gaining birth-right citizenship. Bo says he wants at least 20 US-born offspring — all boys (superior to girls) to one day take over his business. When a Los Angeles Court denied Bo parentage rights over 4 of these babies in 2023 — none of whom he had actually met yet, as he had been “busy” — it exposed the uncertain terrain of international surrogacy arrangements. Where, and to whom, did these children now belong?
In another disturbing story in the press this week, a surrogate mother in Nevada is now suing a Chinese couple in California, alleging she was deceived about their identities and intentions, learning only after giving birth that she had carried the twenty-sixth child for the same pair in quick succession. Some of the babies had been hospitalized by abuse. According to reports, the FBI is now <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/02/04/us-news/surrogate-sues-chinese-parents-of-26-she-claims-duped-her-tell-me-the-truth-about-the-baby-i-carried/">investigating</a> whether the couple were selling these babies they were producing at scale.
Meanwhile, members of Congress are <a href="https://blakemoore.house.gov/media/press-releases/representatives-blake-moore-john-moolenaar-introduce-legislation-to-prevent-foreign-adversaries-from-abusing-american-surrogacy-industry">scrambling</a> to address federal loopholes that allow foreign nationals to use American surrogacy services while securing birthright citizenship for those children.
The free market is one of the great engines of American prosperity, but it has never meant that anything and everything may be bought and sold. America prohibits the sale of organs, the sale of votes, and the sale of citizenship. Western countries do so not because we oppose free markets, but because we understand that some things are too fundamental to human dignity and national integrity to be reduced to commerce.
Surrogacy crosses that line. Under surrogacy, a child becomes a commodity exchanged for cash. Women become raw materials to be exploited for reproductive gain. Payment structures, abortion clauses, ‘selective reduction’ decisions in the case of twins or triplets — all are negotiated with a “surrogate” mother in advance, and are usually at the discretion of the “commissioning party”. Whatever sales language is used — “intended parents,” “journey,” “compassion” — the structure is unmistakably commercial. And increasingly, it is international. <a href="https://eggdonorandsurrogacy.com/surrogacy-trends-2025/">Projections</a> suggest the global surrogacy market will exceed $129 billion by 2034.
Even in situations outside of the extreme, surrogacy is harmful to children. Every surrogacy deal, no matter how well-intentioned, deliberately inflicts a severance wound on a newborn baby – isolating her from the only mother she has ever known – and places her in the care of the adults who commissioned its trauma. Psychologists warn that this kind of early separation can produce lasting harm — post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, attachment disorders, developmental delays, and behavioral issues in later childhood. What adults call a miracle, the child experiences as loss. We don’t allow puppies or kittens to be separated from their mothers until at least 8 weeks following their birth. The commodification of human newborns is striking in comparison.
A national ban on surrogacy is obviously necessary to protect babies from being commercialized, and women’s bodies from being commodified as wombs-for-rent. But a domestic ban will not be enough to fully prevent this exploitation. It isn’t only Chinese billionaires who look to take advantage of reproductive technologies abroad.
Where American couples have found the cost of surrogacy prohibitive at home, they’ve looked to economically vulnerable women in lower-GDP countries – Mexico, Guatemala, Nigeria, across Southeast Asia – to rent their wombs for less. To end exploitation, America must shut down their own role as a consumer in the global trade too.
National bans have turned into an international cat-and-mouse chase. When India banned surrogacy for foreigners after years of operating as a hub for cheaper “reproductive tourism,” international surrogacy clinics quickly migrated to Nepal and Thailand. When Thailand restricted commercial arrangements following scandals, agencies shifted operations over to Cambodia. After Cambodia shut them down, they popped up in Laos. Bans move in the right direction, but we need a global crackdown, fast, to prevent the overseas baby trade from flourishing from one country to the next.
The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, Reem Alsalem, is in agreement. She called for a complete global abolition of surrogacy in her <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/10/un-expert-calls-recognition-surrogacy-system-violence-exploitation-and-abuse">recent report</a> to the United Nations, highlighting human rights abuses intrinsically interwoven in the use of women’s bodies as gestational vessels. The United States is in a powerful international position to embrace this mandate and take a lead on the world stage.
A national ban on surrogacy is an imperative to prevent exploitation at home, but further work must be done to ensure that wealthy American couples don’t continue this unethical practice by buying babies from overseas. For this administration, that means pursuing international cooperation on the issue; negotiating agreements to prohibit such trade; and promoting a shared commitment to protect human dignity across borders. America should have no part in the global trade of human life — be it as consumers or suppliers of the goods. Babies simply aren’t for sale.
* * *
Lois McLatchie Miller (@LoisMcLatch) is a writer and commentator from Great Britain.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Doctor examining a pregnant woman

How America Became A Hub For Global Surrogacy

Children

China

Surrogacy

A Florida couple has filed a lawsuit against a fertility clinic in Orlando after they realized the baby they&#8217;ve been raising wasn&#8217;t their own. Tiffany Score was allegedly implanted with another woman&#8217;s embryo last year during the in vitro fertilization (IVF) process.
According to <a href="https://www.fox35orlando.com/news/florida-couple-ifv-error-lawsuit-search-daughter-biological-parents-moral-obligation">Fox 35</a> in Orlando, the couple welcomed the baby girl in December, but became concerned after noticing that she appeared to be a different ethnicity than either parent. The couple wants to raise the baby, but their lawyer told The Daily Wire the main priority is finding her biological parents.
&#8220;We love our little girl, and if possible, we would hope to be able to continue to raise her ourselves with confidence that she won’t be taken away from us,&#8221; Steven Mills and Tiffany Score said in a statement. &#8220;At the same time, we are aware that we have a moral obligation to find and notify her biological parents as it is in her best interest that her genetic parents are provided the option to raise her as their own.&#8221;
Mills and Score are suing the Fertility Center of Orlando, as well as a physician, alleging the doctor implanted the wrong embryo, resulting in Score giving birth to a baby who is not genetically hers or her husband&#8217;s.
The mother underwent an embryo transfer in April of 2025 before giving birth in December. The lawsuit alleges the Fertility Center of Orlando implanted the wrong embryo five years after the couple had the mother&#8217;s embryos frozen.
The lawsuit states that the parents have formed an &#8220;intensely strong emotional bond&#8221; with the baby after Score carried and delivered the child, which the couple named Shea.
&#8220;Despite the certain knowledge that Shea is not their genetically matched child, the emotional bond grows stronger every minute of every day that Shea remains in their care,&#8221; the lawsuit said. &#8220;They would willingly keep her in their care; however, for the sake of both Shea and her genetic parents, they recognize that Shea should legally and morally be united with her genetic parents so long as they are fit, able and willing to take her.&#8221;
The couple&#8217;s attorneys are now seeking an emergency injunction, requiring the clinic to preserve records, notify other potentially affected patients, and begin immediate genetic testing for the clinic&#8217;s clients. The lawsuit, obtained by Fox News, states that Mills and Score are asking the clinic to pay for the genetic testing of every child born whose parents had embryos implanted at the clinic during the last five years.
&#8220;Of equal concern to the Plaintiffs is the obvious possibility that someone else was implanted with one or more of their embryos and is pregnant with or has been pregnant with and is presently parenting one or more of their children,&#8221; the lawsuit stated.
The fertility clinic released a statement to Fox 35, claiming officials are looking into this &#8220;error.&#8221;
&#8220;We are actively cooperating with an investigation to support one of our patients in determining the source of an error that resulted in the birth of a child who is not genetically related to them. Multiple entities are involved in this process, and all parties are working diligently to help identify when and where the error may have occurred. Our priority remains transparency and the well-being of the patient and child involved. We will continue to assist in any way that we can, regardless of the outcome of the investigation.&#8221;
Fox 35 spoke to legal experts who said that a child&#8217;s legal parents are typically the genetic mother and father, not the birth mother.

Credit: Searcy Law

Florida Couple Sues Fertility Clinic Over Embryo Mix-Up: ‘Moral Obligation’ To Find ‘Genetic Parents’

Florida

General

U.S.

In 2026, Britain will hit three grim milestones.
First, it will see the number of deaths <a href="https://www.the-independent.com/news/uk/home-news/resolution-foundation-deaths-births-economy-b2894591.html">exceed</a> the number of births for the first time in modern history.
Second, <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/01/15/abortions-at-record-high-in-over-35s-because-babies-are-too/">a third</a> of the babies conceived will be aborted.
Third, the number of migrants in its population (10.9 million) will roughly equate to the total number of children aborted (10.7 million) since the procedure became legalized in 1968.
In other words, by ending unborn lives on an industrial scale, the native British population has created a demographic vacuum it now plugs with immigration, and in doing so, has brought itself to the brink of quiet obliteration.
For Brits, the question of abortion is no longer only an ethical one. A nation that does not reproduce itself must import its future. That is not a moral judgment on immigrants, but a mathematical reality. A critical shortage of young people means a critical shortage of recruits for the armed forces, workers in critical industries, and taxpayers to fund defense, healthcare, pensions, and other social services.
If it cannot “grow our own” workforce, it must import one from elsewhere.
Of course, relying on mass immigration to plug a demographic hole of our own making is not a neutral solution. It carries serious national security implications. As has been clear in recent years, weak, strained border controls, over-used and under pressure, give way to criminal gangs, swept in undetected alongside the key workers we need.
Yet while Right-wing politicians fall over themselves to condemn mass migration, hardly anyone in Westminster will risk breathing a word about the abortion crisis that has brought our nation to the point of requiring large-scale human importation. Meanwhile, Members of Parliament <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/17/world/europe/uk-abortion-law.html">recently voted</a> to exacerbate abortion culture by decriminalizing the procedure up to birth.
Britain is a prime example of why the abortion debate, though emotive and divisive, is worth having. Though some Americans may roll their eyes at the March for Life or the pro-life rhetoric being championed by Republicans, they’d do well to look overseas at a nation which has let abortion destroy them. 
The consequences of abortion, of course, are not only macro-economic. The loss of life alone is devastating, in the case of every child. Broadly, our collective failure to focus on family has left Brits lonelier and more depressed than ever. And as for those women who have undergone an abortion, physical complications, mental health struggles, and silent grief ripple through our healthcare system and society. &#8220;Pro-choice&#8221; psychology professor David Fergusson <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23553240/">published evidence</a> that women who have abortions are significantly more likely to suffer from anxiety, suicidal ideation, and drug and alcohol abuse. Pretending this is a “cost-free” procedure helps no-one.
What makes Britain’s situation especially tragic is that it was avoidable. Marriage &#8211; one of the greatest proximate predictors for adults to have children &#8211; is punished by the UK tax system, discouraging family formation and making it harder to depend on one salary. In the workplace, motherhood is treated as a liability. Poor maternity leave provision and the constant push of government-sponsored “free childcare” pushes women who do have kids back into taxable desk jobs, rather than encouraging them to invest in time at home with their children. All the while, the culture champions the idea that babies are inconvenient competitors to the luxuries of modern life. Abortion is the far cheaper, easier policy option in many ways. But in the long-term, it leads to a nation collapsing from within.
This is why abortion is no longer just a moral issue, but one of national survival. A society cannot abort a third of its future generation and expect to remain intact. Britain is not simply declining, but aborting itself out of existence. America should take note, and continue to fight for a culture supportive of bringing babies into the world. Once a culture decides children are optional, the future becomes optional too.
* * *
Lois McLatchie Miller (@LoisMcLatch) is a writer and commentator from Great Britain.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

British flag burning

Britain Is Aborting Itself To Death

England

mass migration

Pro-Life Movement

In an era of spiraling political absurdity, America finds itself squandering precious time and resources on what should be one of the most straightforward, apolitical facts of human existence: only women can get pregnant.
Even Democrat strategist James Carville recently <a href="https://x.com/GrabienMedia/status/2012559321582772621">mocked the absurdity</a> of today’s gender politics on Fox News, saying, “I’m not worried about getting pregnant. I have no idea why this is the number one issue in America.”
It’s time to stop pretending this point of view is controversial. As a mom, I’m calling for this political charade to end in 2026.
After many decades of modern scientific consensus, which follows centuries and even millennia of common sense on the subject, we’ve somehow devolved into laughably ridiculous disagreements over gender. This isn’t just science; it is the order of creation itself, designed by God with intention and clarity. But it is politically unserious to convene hearings where elected politicians and sitting Supreme Court Justices go through the motions of grilling so-called experts on a matter that, in terms of objective reality, isn’t even up for debate.
Imagine a congressional hearing on whether gravity affects everyone equally, or if some people can ‘identify’ as not being subject to such a narrow-minded and restrictive force. Or, imagine someone bringing a case before the Supreme Court to decide whether humans require oxygen to live, or if some could ‘identify’ as anaerobic and live on carbon dioxide alone. We, the serious masses, wouldn’t even entertain the conversation. We would turn our attention to real political issues like immigration, national security, or the economy, and not waste our time.
Speaking of which, I don’t have much time to waste these days. I just welcomed our third child in three years into this world. It was beautiful, painful, exhausting, and awe-inspiring; the kind of experience that reminds you just how extraordinary the female body truly is. God entrusted me to carry a child and give birth, something only a woman can do. A man is simply incapable of doing what I did. That isn’t opinion, it’s biological reality.
And as a mother who just gave birth, I’m exhausted that this ever became a political issue. Women shouldn’t have to fight to own something as fundamental as pregnancy.
Which is why I was so disgusted when I watched the congressional hearing where Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) questioned the so-called “expert,” and (somehow) certified OB/GYN, Dr. Nisha Verma.
Dr. Verma testified before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on abortion pill safety. She represented Physicians for Reproductive Health, and Sen. Hawley asked her a simple question that has an objective, biological, common-sense answer: “Can men get pregnant?”
Dr. Verma, who definitely knows the answer, repeatedly dodged the question — insisting instead that it was a “political tool” that “polarized” the discussion and failed to capture the “complex experiences” of her patients. I wonder if Dr. Verma would also dodge questions about whether people could choose to live without oxygen or decide that gravity doesn’t apply to them. Would she claim such farcical questions are political tools that polarize?
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
SPOILER ALERT: Men cannot get pregnant <a href="https://t.co/08JwHUlxIj">pic.twitter.com/08JwHUlxIj</a>
— Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) <a href="https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/2011480384467349892?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 14, 2026</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Credit: @HawleyMO/X.com
That is really the crux of the issue here; none of this should be treated as a political issue. A serious nation would not waste another moment nor another taxpayer dollar entertaining such an unserious conversation. The entire premise should be dismissed outright as unworthy of the time it would take to even ask such a ludicrous question. Stop indulging delusion and start governing in reality.
Incredibly, this Senate hearing came just days after the Supreme Court heard arguments regarding men in women’s sports. Ironically, this is the same thing that happened to one of the sitting Justices during her confirmation hearing, when she was unable to answer a similar question — “What is a woman?” More incredible still, she and every other person still hung up on this issue suddenly know what a woman is when it comes to breaking the glass ceiling and placing the first black woman on the Supreme Court of the United States.
Suddenly, they all know what a woman is? Suddenly, that distinction matters? No, not suddenly. They always knew because it’s an objective, reality-based fact that isn’t up for debate, unless we pretend along with those who want to bend reality.
Even James Carville wasn’t just stating a fact; he was calling out how absurd the debate itself has become. His joke on Fox News wasn’t about biology; it was about how fake and manufactured this entire controversy is. But Democrats keep entertaining fiction to pander to rabid extremists and then expect the rest of the country to play along.
The bottom line is simple: there is no debate, so entertaining one is foolish. Polling consistently shows that most Americans are willing to publicly admit that they understand the biological reality of sex. Voters aren’t confused, but Washington is pretending to be. Americans are tired of political grandstanding on issues that don’t matter. And 2026 should be the year this nonsense ends.
It’s time to stop coddling absurdity as though we owe irrationality an esteemed seat at every table. One might say that when you wrestle with a pig in lipstick, it’s still a pig, and you both get dirty. It’s not respect, and it’s not compassion. It’s suicidal empathy. If we let lunacy hijack constructive conversation, we all crash together.
###
Jillian Anderson King is a former Washington Redskins Cheerleader Ambassador and ABC’s The Bachelor and The Bachelor in Paradise contestant. She’s a Mombassador for Moms for America, an ambassador for Turning Point and Turning Point Faith, and a proud Christian Conservative mother and wife. Jillian is also the founder of The Kings Firm, a strategic communications firm.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

27th SCAD Savannah Film Festival – Portraits

Men Can’t Get Pregnant. Even James Carville Knows That.

Gender

gender ideology

Josh Hawley

Mothers

Opinion

SCOTUS

Supreme Court

Transgender

When my parents sent me to college at age 16, they were naturally nervous. But their nerves were calmed by the fact that I would be attending a Christian school — a school that avowed the same beliefs and values as they did.
As it turns out, that shouldn’t have reassured them.
According to a <a href="https://studentsforlife.org/2026/01/13/shocking-1-in-7-faith-based-schools-connected-to-abortion-industry/">stunning new report</a>, more than 1 in 7 Christian colleges directly violated their professed faith in the 2024-2025 school year by maintaining a relationship with Planned Parenthood or the abortion industry. That’s fully 1 in 7 colleges publicly proclaiming Christ while privately violating the most basic Christian value: the dignity of life.
That’s not counting the myriad of colleges that plaster the name of Christ on top of an otherwise completely secular school. The study, conducted by Students for Life of America’s Demetree Institute for Pro-Life Advancement (IPA), only looked at schools directly affiliated with a Christ-centered denomination — schools that publicly affirmed faith in their mission statement.
Nor were the schools’ infractions minor in nature. More than one-fourth of the offending schools were Christian schools that referred students to Planned Parenthood as a “health resource.”
That fact would be distressing even if the schools in question were secular. Reports from outlets as left-wing as the New York Times document the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/15/us/planned-parenthood-clinics.html">abysmal standard of care</a> at Planned Parenthood facilities, including staff instructions to limit appointments to just 10 minutes in order to churn through as many patients as possible.
But for Christian schools, such referrals don’t just pose a threat to student health; they’re a direct betrayal of the faith they proclaim.
Students, parents, and donors expect schools bearing the name “Christian” to live out their faith. But IPA’s report shows just how many fall short of that calling.
And unfortunately, the problem is only growing. According to IPA, Christian schools have increased their support for abortion by 19.82% overall since the 2022 reversal of Roe v. Wade. Since 2024, that support has increased by a full 38.63%.
And while some might seek to dismiss the problem as limited to a single rogue denomination, that’s simply not the case. IPA eliminated from its study schools belonging to denominations that have affirmed abortion — like the Disciples of Christ, Quakers, and Moravians. Even after eliminating those denominations, IPA found that over half the remaining denominations — those that have not expressed support for abortion — had at least one school with ties to abortion.
Clearly, the issue is not one that can be avoided by simply attending a school from a different denomination. For Christian pro-lifers seeking an education aligned with their values, the future seems grim.
But fortunately, the news isn’t all bad. According to IPA’s report, a full 50 ties between Christian schools and Planned Parenthood were severed during the 2024-2025 school year, thanks to interventions and awareness fostered by IPA. And after researchers reached out to offending schools in July 2025, four schools cut all ties to the abortion industry, and another four removed some.
This success points to the path forward. Higher education institutions depend on the support of students, parents, alumni, and donors. If these groups express undeniably—with their words and, if necessary, their pocketbooks—that they will not stand for compromise, Christian colleges will have no choice but to cut ties with the abortion industry or to stop falsely claiming the name of Christ.
I’m thankful that the school I attended, The Master’s University, a small Christian college north of Los Angeles, lives out its professed faith. Notably, it received an “A” rating in IPA’s report — meaning no ties to Planned Parenthood/the abortion industry were found. But the same should be true of all schools claiming Christianity.
If a student decides to attend a Christian school, they should know exactly what they’re getting: a school that affirms biblical truth, starting with the simple reality that every human life is sacred.
* * *
Mary Mobley is a press specialist and online editor at Students for Life.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

US-VATICAN-RELIGION-POPE-UNIVERSITY

New Study: Planned Parenthood Has Quietly Invaded Christian Colleges

Christian Colleges

Christianity

Dobbs

Judeo-Christian Values

Planned Parenthood

It’s a sure sign of Christmas when we hear Nat King Cole crooning about chestnuts roasting on an open fire. While few of us have experienced eating such warm roasted chestnuts, we can surely relate to seeing “tiny tots with their eyes all aglow.”
When children experience the bright lights of the Christmas Season, they can hardly open their eyes wide enough to take in all the beauty. From living room Christmas trees to sparkling downtown squares, bright, colorful decorations are everywhere. And, as the lyrics remind us, the bright lights are most exquisite when they are reflected in the eyes and on the faces of children, especially young children. 
What do we really see on these precious little faces? What best describes the look of wonder reflected in the wide eyes of children taking in the lights?
It’s joy.
The innocent expressions of wonder on the face of a child can bring joy to all of us, even when things aren’t stellar for us adults. A child’s perception of this light-filled season can even melt the hearts of all the Scrooges in our midst.
That’s because children don’t just reflect the season; they are represented by the central character in the Christmas story. After all, the Christ Child is the focus of the attention of all the participants in the nativity. The lowly animals, the shepherds, the wise men, and, of course, Mary and Joseph. Our front-yard nativity sets may have all of those frozen figurines at once, even though the story itself plays out over a longer period. Just as the Star of Bethlehem lit that special night more than two millennia ago, the bright lights we see today can brighten even our darkest nights.
Yet the message of joy that still flows from that manger came with its own set of challenges, many of which we still face today. The pregnancy was unexpected. Housing insecurity was real. A government edict forced an ill-timed travel issue. The soon-to-be husband was not the father of the baby. Such challenges have the potential to steal joy, not bring it. And yet, after 2,000 years, we memorialize it on our lawns, over the mantel, or in dioramas that dominate our home décor. No matter the conditions of their conception, babies have a way of bringing joy and smiles.
Carl Sandburg once said, “A baby is God&#8217;s opinion that life should go on.” That is true with every new life, as much as it was with the Christ Child. The next generation is the hope for the future of our families, our communities, and of the world.
The story of Mary and the manger reminds us that every woman should be loved and supported in her pregnancy, despite her immediate circumstances. The spark of life within every child in the womb should be welcomed and nurtured, cherished and treasured. Temporary obstacles should be overcome so that every tiny tot has a chance to be filled with wonder and joy at Christmas. Each of us should do our part to help someone near us, or close by us, or maybe even someone we’ll never get the chance to meet, be able to greet their little one with joy and gratitude.
That is what motivates the life-affirming work of pregnancy help in communities all over the country every day of the year. Whether around the kitchen table in a maternity home or through an ultrasound at a pregnancy medical clinic, or in the placement of a child into an adoptive family, pregnancy help provides real help for real needs to those dealing with temporary challenges.
All pregnancies are temporary, even the unexpected ones. And every life should have a chance to make a positive mark on the world and future generations.
That holy night reminds us of more than the value of just that one child. That “silent night” stands as a powerful proclamation for each of us to welcome the work of God when it comes as a baby. We should make way, or “prepare him room,” for “love’s pure light” to shine into, and through, our hearts at this special time of year and all year long. That’s what empowers each of us to light up with joy and sing, “Joy to the World!”
* * *
Jor-El Godsey is president of Heartbeat International.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=editorial&amp;utm_campaign=christmas&amp;utm_content=christmassale25">Christmas Sale &#8211; Get 40% off New DailyWire+ Annual Memberships</a>

Little Girl Decorating Christmas Tree.

Joy To The World, One Child At A Time

Bible

Christmas

Jesus Christ

Americans are finding common ground on an unexpected issue, abortion drugs. <a href="https://sbaprolife.org/newsroom/press-releases/breaking-7-in-10-voters-want-to-roll-back-biden-covid-abortion-drug-policy-reinstate-in-person-doctor-visits">New polling</a> shows that rolling back dangerous Biden-era policies on the drugs is not only supported by a majority of Americans, but such support transcends traditional party divides and the “pro-life” versus “pro-choice” label.
Seven in 10 likely voters <a href="https://sbaprolife.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/National-Voter-Survey-Executive-Summary-.pdf">approve</a> of reinstating safeguards around the drugs by requiring a doctor visit for abortion drug prescriptions. Even more revealing, the majority of voters who were surveyed for the poll identify as “pro-choice,” representing a possible shift in how voters view the repercussions of the drugs for women’s health and safety.
Another 70% of respondents support doctors screening for and reporting possible abuse and coercion before prescribing the drugs, a policy that could have prevented the tragedy <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-attorney-poisoned-pregnant-wife-abortion-medication-sentenced-18-rcna138065">Catherine Herring</a> experienced firsthand when her husband purchased lethal abortion drugs online and tried to end her pregnancy by lacing her drinks.
Catherine’s abuser was enabled by the Biden Administration’s removal of abortion drug safeguards, which eliminated in-person dispensing requirements for abortion pills under the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program. As a result, it’s easier than ever for would-be abusers and coercers to obtain the pills via mail. The FDA’s recent approval of a new generic version of the abortion drug mifepristone only compounds these risks for women by making the drugs even easier to access.
The response has been swift, with groups urging the FDA to rescind their approval and restore policies that protect women’s health and safety while affirming life.
The dangers of abortion drugs have never been more apparent. A recent <a href="https://eppc.org/news/largest-ever-study-of-abortion-pill-reveals-shocking-number-of-adverse-events/">study</a> from the Ethics and Public Policy Center found that serious adverse events from the abortion drug are approximately 22 times more frequent than the FDA currently reports, with over one in ten women experiencing sepsis, infection, hemorrhaging, or other harmful side-effects.
A peer-reviewed <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2673-6284/14/2/39">article</a> from the Charlotte Lozier Institute also debunked the popular claim that the abortion pill is “safer than Tylenol.” Just recently, the American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs (AAPLOG) <a href="https://aaplogaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/2025.08.20-One-Pager-Clostridial-Infection-after-Mifepristone.pdf">sounded the alarm</a> on a dangerous sepsis-like infection that can occur after a pregnant woman takes mifepristone.
Even Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. publicly <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/rfk-jr-says-biden-twisted-the-data-on-abortion-pill-safety">admitted</a> that the Biden Administration had “twisted the data to bury one of the safety signals, a very high safety signal, around 11 percent” related to abortion drugs. Yet the FDA significantly expanded access to mifepristone with the approval of the new generic pill, rather than pausing to examine the current evidence of harm or complete the agency’s <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/rfk-fda-abortion-pill-mifepristone-safety-review/">promised report</a> on the safety of the drug.
In any other area of medicine, such findings would have triggered alarm, inquiry, and reform. In the absence of any such immediate action, the pro-life movement, state attorneys general, and Congress are standing in the gap to protect women.
A <a href="https://www.liveaction.org/news/coalition-hhs-fda-pull-abortion-pill-approval">coalition</a> of advocacy and policy organizations – led by Live Action with support from Students for Life, Concerned Women for America, Heartbeat International, Advancing American Freedom, AAPLOG, the Life Leadership Conference, and several others – joined with state leaders to demand a reversal of the FDA&#8217;s decision to approve the new generic version of mifepristone.
Attorney generals from twenty-two states, led by Alabama’s Steve Marshall, <a href="https://www.alabamaag.gov/attorney-general-steve-marshall-condemns-the-fdas-illegal-and-dangerous-decision-to-abandon-restrictions-on-abortion-inducing-drugs/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CIn%20direct%20contravention%20of%20longstanding,terms%20for%20%E2%80%9Cprioritizing%20.%20.%20.">denounced</a> the FDA’s “illegal and dangerous” rollback of in-person dispensing rules. Fifteen more have <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5427732-republican-states-target-abortion/">called on Congress</a> to confront “shield laws” that allow doctors to mail abortion drugs into pro-life states while circumventing state laws.
Earlier this month, Senator Lindsey Graham led 51 senators in sending a <a href="https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2025/10/51-republican-senators-urge-fda-to-continue-to-stand-for-life-reevaluate-generic-abortion-pill-approval">joint letter</a> to Secretary Kennedy and FDA Commissioner Marty Makary, urging them to halt the rollout of the new generic drug and reinstate the safety rules that once governed its use.
Senate HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy followed with an <a href="https://sbaprolife.org/newsroom/press-releases/help-committee-chairman-cassidy-leads-critical-oversight-effort-on-abortion-drugs">oversight letter</a> pressing the same officials to explain how the agency could expand access while simultaneously pledging to “review the ongoing data.” Cassidy warned that the FDA’s decision “fails to mitigate the risks to women that have been identified and fails to protect women from the coercive use of the drug.”
The central claim is simple: women’s health and safety are on the line. The FDA and HHS must act to restore crucial safeguards.
Pro-life groups and elected officials echo the voices of women who have been harmed directly by abortion drugs. Women like <a href="https://eppc.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/1-Complaint-8.11.2025_compressed.pdf">Liana Davis</a>, whose hot chocolate was laced with abortion drugs by her boyfriend, resulting in a miscarriage; <a href="https://www.liveaction.org/news/victim-coerced-mail-order-abortion-suing-fda">Rosalie Markezich,</a> who was coerced by her boyfriend into taking mail-order abortion pills; and <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-attorney-poisoned-pregnant-wife-abortion-medication-sentenced-18-rcna138065">Catherine Herring,</a> who unknowingly consumed abortion drugs slipped into her drink by her husband.
Their heartbreaking stories shine a light on the true costs of uncontrolled abortion drugs. Americans understand those costs too, and a majority want to see crucial safeguards restored. The FDA and HHS must respond and act before more women are harmed.
* * *
<a href="https://x.com/davidbereit">David Bereit</a> is the executive director of the Life Leadership Conference.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Correction: The image for this article has been replaced and the second paragraph was updated for accuracy.

Wyoming’s Only Abortion Clinic Forced To Stop Administering Abortions Due To New State Law

The Bipartisan Backlash Against Mail-Order Abortion Pills

Live Action

Mifepristone

In an effort to thumb their noses at President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/rfk-jr-to-link-tylenol-use-in-pregnancy-to-autism-says-wall-street-journal">Robert F. Kennedy Jr.</a>, liberal pregnant women have taken to filming themselves popping acetaminophen (Tylenol) tablets — despite an eight-year-old social media post from the drugmaker itself warning against it.
&#8220;We actually don&#8217;t recommend using any of our products while pregnant. Thank you for taking the time to voice your concerns today,&#8221; the company&#8217;s official X account posted in March of 2017.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
We actually don&#8217;t recommend using any of our products while pregnant. Thank you for taking the time to voice your concerns today.
— TYLENOL® (@tylenol) <a href="https://twitter.com/tylenol/status/839196906702127106?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 7, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
And it wasn&#8217;t even just the one time — Tylenol&#8217;s account posted similar statements on several occasions.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
It&#8217;s almost like Tylenol doesn&#8217;t want you to use Tylenol while pregnant. 
📷:<a href="https://twitter.com/TheEmperorSon?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TheEmperorSon</a> <a href="https://t.co/IDg4aYLPq5">pic.twitter.com/IDg4aYLPq5</a>
— Autism Capital 🧩 (@AutismCapital) <a href="https://twitter.com/AutismCapital/status/1970899261987618924?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Department of Health and Human Services also shared the old post, saying, &#8220;No caption needed.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
No caption needed. <a href="https://t.co/pcZYyPdGg4">pic.twitter.com/pcZYyPdGg4</a>
— HHS.gov (@HHSGov) <a href="https://twitter.com/HHSGov/status/1970868168995536978?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The White House account shared the Tylenol recommendation as well, along with a photo of the president holding one of his signature red baseball caps that said &#8220;TRUMP WAS RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<a href="https://t.co/LjALiSXN5J">https://t.co/LjALiSXN5J</a> <a href="https://t.co/B23RA0MVi7">pic.twitter.com/B23RA0MVi7</a>
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) <a href="https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1970865002027614636?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The women filming themselves taking the drug were doing so in reaction to a <a href="https://x.com/PressSec/status/1970276365116268622">press conference</a> that took place on Monday, during which President Trump and HHS Secretary Kennedy raised questions about the possibility of a causal link between autism and mothers who had used acetaminophen during pregnancy or had given it to their children as infants.
Kennedy is far from the first to raise such a concern.
A Mount Sinai <a href="https://www.mountsinai.org/about/newsroom/2025/mount-sinai-study-supports-evidence-that-prenatal-acetaminophen-use-may-be-linked-to-increased-risk-of-autism-and-adhd">study</a> published in August suggested that there was a link between prenatal acetaminophen use and both autism and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
<a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5536672/">Findings</a> published by the National Institutes of Health in 2017 suggested that Tylenol use in infants and young children may pose an even greater risk for autism and ADHD than use during pregnancy.
In 2019, a <a href="https://hub.jhu.edu/2019/11/05/acetaminophen-pregnancy-autism-adhd/">study</a> from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health found that acetaminophen use during pregnancy was associated with elevated risks for autism and ADHD.
But still, in order to push back on Trump and Kennedy, pregnant women began posting videos of themselves as they swallowed the pills.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Just to stick it to Trump and RFK Jr, liberal women who are pregnant are posting videos on social media of them downing Tylenol
This is so sad.. <a href="https://t.co/mEDyDRoraL">pic.twitter.com/mEDyDRoraL</a>
— Students For Trump (@TrumpStudents) <a href="https://twitter.com/TrumpStudents/status/1970558892846522571?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 23, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Dr. Nicole Saphier begged them to stop, saying, &#8220;Pregnant women popping Tylenol like Tic Tacs just to stick it to Trump — please stop. Don’t weaponize your pregnancy for a political point. Consider acetaminophen only when absolutely necessary, for the shortest duration and lowest dose, even the makers of Tylenol say this.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Pregnant women popping Tylenol like Tic Tacs just to stick it to Trump — please stop.
Don’t weaponize your pregnancy for a political point.
Consider acetaminophen only when absolutely necessary, for the shortest duration and lowest dose, even the makers of Tylenol say this.
— Nicole Saphier, MD (@NBSaphierMD) <a href="https://twitter.com/NBSaphierMD/status/1970554174438887581?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 23, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Menu